OSPI UPDATE ON COMMON CORE ASSESSMENTS, STUDENT GROWTH PERCENTILES, AND ESEA WAIVER

DECEMBER 5, 2013

Presented by: Robin Munson, Ph.D.Assistant Superintendent of Assessment and Student Information

Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction

TRANSITION TO NEW ASSESSMENTS

2013-14 AND 2014-15

2

Balanced Assessment

• Coverage of full breadth/depth of Common Core

• Computer Adaptive Testing (CAT)• Precise assessment of all students• More engaging assessment experience

• Performance Tasks – real world problems

Summative Assessments

for Accountability

• Optional for district, school or classroom use• Fully aligned with Common Core – same item

pool• Focus on set of standards or clone

summative test• Teachers can review and score responses

Interim Assessments

to Signal Improvement • Digital library gives access to high-quality

resources • Tools/materials for classroom-based

assessments• Professional social networking (Web-based

PLCs)• Useful for in-service and pre-service

development

Formative Tools and

Resources for Improved

Instruction

✔

3

✔ ✔

Major Milestones in Development of Summative Assessments

Cognitive Labs Apr –

Aug 2012

Small Scale

Trials Mar –

Nov 2012

Pilot TestingFeb –

May 2013

Field Test

Mar – June 2014

Deploy For Operational

UseFall 2014

✔ ✔ ✔

Early Q.C. of items & software; no student results Full system run-through; Establish performance standards

4

Accommodations

5

• The Usability, Accessibility, and Accommodations Guidelines are available at http://www.smarterbalanced.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/SmarterBalanced_Guidelines_091113.pdf

Learn More and Stay Engagedwww.smarterbalanced.org

6

• Visit us at: SmarterBalanced.org

• Follow on Twitter: @SmarterBalanced

• Also OSPI’s page: http://www.k12.wa.us/smarter/default.aspx

OFFI

CE O

F SU

PERI

NTEN

DENT

OF

PUBL

IC IN

STRU

CTIO

NWith Summative High School Assessments in 2014–15 and beyond

English/LA Mathematics Science(no change)

Grade 3 SBAC SBACGrade 4 SBAC SBACGrade 5 SBAC SBAC MSPGrade 6 SBAC SBACGrade 7 SBAC SBACGrade 8 SBAC SBAC MSPGrades10 (until Class of 2019)

Comprehensive ELA

exit exam

Year 1or Year 2 EOC exit exam

EOC Biologyexit exam (until

NGSS)Grade 11 SBAC – College

and Career ReadySBAC – College

and Career Ready

SBAC=SMARTER Balanced Assessment ConsortiumMSP= Measurements of Student ProgressEOC= End of Course exams 7

OFFI

CE O

F SU

PERI

NTEN

DENT

OF

PUBL

IC IN

STRU

CTIO

N

HS Testing for Graduation (new June 30)

Graduation Assessment Requirements Classes of 2013 and 2014

HSPE Reading, HSPE Writing; 1 EOC Math

Classes of 2015 – 2018 ELA exit exam; 1 EOC Math exit exam; EOC Biology Smarter Balanced ELA and math tests taken in 11th for

school accountability

Class of 2019 and beyond Smarter Balanced tests in ELA and Math; Biology or

NGSS

8

OFFI

CE O

F SU

PERI

NTEN

DENT

OF

PUBL

IC IN

STRU

CTIO

N

What’s Happening This Year, 2013-14?

Exit exams remain the same (HSPE, EOC)

CAA options remain the same Class of 2013 had some relaxation of Collection of

Evidence rules that had been newly implemented – these will not continue (COE is limited to one submission per content area throughout HS, and requires two attempts on general assessment before submitting)

Some schools will administer Smarter Balanced field test

9

OFFI

CE O

F SU

PERI

NTEN

DENT

OF

PUBL

IC IN

STRU

CTIO

N

Smarter Balanced Field Testing March - June 2014 Purpose: Evaluate items and tasks for Smarter

Balanced pool… Statistical data analysis of 22,000+ items Divide items/tasks into secure (summative) pool and

open (interim) pool Conduct standard setting for different performance

levels (“cut scores”) Sampling requires about 10% of each state’s

students for ELA and about 10% for math Washington has about 33% participating in

grades 3-8, and 10% in 11th 10

OFFI

CE O

F SU

PERI

NTEN

DENT

OF

PUBL

IC IN

STRU

CTIO

N

Smarter Balanced Field Testing US Dept of Ed is allowing states to participate

in the Smarter Balanced field test in 2013-14 (pending ESEA Waiver approval): Washington has opted for the blended model

(grades 3-8 only) where some schools take current tests and some schools take field tests If only giving field tests, school accountability is carried

over from 2013 MSP Waiver will be submitted at end of November– approval

likely in December High schools need to administer all current state

tests due to graduation requirements

11

A Balanced Assessment System for 2014-15 and beyond

School Year Last 7-12 weeks of the year*

DIGITAL CLEARINGHOUSE OF FORMATIVE TOOLS, PROCESSES AND EXEMPLARS Released items and tasks; Model curriculum units; Educator training; Professional development tools and resources; Scorer training modules; Teacher collaboration tools; Evaluation of publishers’ assessments.

English Language Arts/Literacy and Mathematics, Grades 3-8 and 11

Computer Adaptive

Assessment andPerformance

Tasks

Computer Adaptive

Assessment andPerformance

TasksScope, sequence, number and timing of interim assessments locally determined

*Time windows may be adjusted based on results from the research agenda and final implementation decisions.

PERFORMANCE TASKS

• ELA/Literacy• Mathematics

Re-take option

COMPUTER ADAPTIVE

TESTS

• ELA/Literacy• Mathematics

Optional Interim

Assessment

Optional Interim

Assessment

12

STUDENT GROWTH PERCENTILES

13

STUDENT GROWTH PERCENTILES -VARIOUS USES• Monitor and report growth for individual

students (parent reports)• Monitor and report growth for schools

(new Achievement Index)• Monitor and report growth, where

available and appropriate, as a part of teacher and principal evaluations (TPEP)

14

KEY CONCEPTS FOR SGPS• Growth levels (low, typical, high) are descriptive only

• To calculate SGPs, we use all previous consecutive scores, not just the previous year

• SGPs are available for Math (4th – 10th graders) and Reading (4th – 8th and 10th graders)

• Academic peers are students with a similar score history and are defined using quantile regression

15

• SGPs show student progress over time, instead of only looking at percent meeting standard at one point in time

• SGPs can still be used if assessments or standards change from year to year

• SGPs allow us to project how much growth is needed for a student to meet standard (adequate growth)

ADVANTAGES OF GROWTH

16

STUDENT GROWTH PERCENTILES -WHERE WE ARE• March 2013: SGPs from 2011 & 2012 provided to districts for

Grades 4–8 and high school (reading & math MSP, HSPE, & EOC)*• October 2013: SGPs from 2013 provided to districts• December 2013: SGPs made public in K-12 Data and Reports

Longitudinal Data System• January 2014: SGPs used in new Achievement Index• October 2014: SGPs from 2014 provided to districts for schools

that administer current state assessments• October 2015: SGPs from 2015 (Smarter Balanced) provided to

districts • October 2016: SGPs from 2016 (Smarter Balanced) provided to

districts (could use in 2016–17 evaluations)

*High school SGPs will be available for consecutive year tests (e.g., 8th MSP, 9th Algebra 1, 10th Geometry)17

Implementation of School Improvement Requirements– Flexibility from requirement for school districts to

identify or take improvement actions for schools identified for improvement, corrective action, or restructuring

– Eliminates Public School Choice (PSC) as a mandate– Eliminates Supplemental Educational Services (SES)

as a mandate– Eliminates the 20% district Title I set aside to fund

PSC and SES– Eliminates the 10% set aside for professional

development for schools

ESEA FLEXIBILITY TO IMPROVE STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AND INCREASE THE QUALITY OF INSTRUCTION

18

WHAT DOES ESEA FLEXIBILITY REQUIRE FROM STATES?

1. Ensure college- and career-ready expectations for all students in Washington– Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and Smarter

Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) 2. Implement state-developed system of

differentiated recognition, accountability, and support

3. Support effective instruction and leadership in Washington— Teacher and Principal Evaluation Project (TPEP)

4. Reduce duplication and unnecessary burden on school districts by the state

19

PRINCIPLE 1: COLLEGE- AND CAREER-READY EXPECTATIONS FOR ALL STUDENTS

To support States in continuing the work of transitioning students, teachers, and schools to higher standards

• Adopt college- and career-ready (CCR) standards in at least reading/language arts and mathematics

• Transition to and implement CCR standards• Develop and administer Statewide, aligned,

high-quality assessments that measure student growth

• Adopt English Language Proficiency (ELP) standards corresponding to the State’s new CCR standards and develop aligned assessments 20

PRINCIPLE 1 - NEXT STEPS

Action Timeline

Full implementation of Common Core 2013 – 2014

Smarter Balanced field tests in ELA and Math

April - June, 2014

Operational Smarter Balanced tests 2014 - 2015

Adopt English Language Proficiency Standards

December, 2013

21

PRINCIPLE 2: STATE-DEVELOPED DIFFERENTIATED RECOGNITION, ACCOUNTABILITY, AND SUPPORT

To support states’ efforts to move forward with next-generation accountability systems

• Set ambitious but achievable Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs)

• Reward schools: Provide incentives and recognition for high-progress and highest performing Title I schools

• Priority schools: Identify lowest performing schools and implement interventions aligned with the turnaround principles

• Focus schools: Close achievement gaps by identifying and implementing interventions in schools with the greatest achievement gaps or low graduation rates

• Provide incentives and supports for other Title I schools (Emerging Schools)

• Build State Education Agency (SEA), Local Education Agency (LEA), and school capacity to improve student learning in all schools

22

PRINCIPLE 2 - NEXT STEPSAction TimelineDouble testing waiver request submitted Nov 20, 2013

Achievement and Accountability Workgroup developed new Achievement Index

Jan - July, 2013

Modeling of Reward, Priority and Focus schools lists using new Achievement Index

Nov-Dec, 2013

Principle 2 amendment to use new Achievement Index to be submitted

December ?, 2013

Identification of Reward, Priority and Focus Schools

January-March 2014 ?

23

PRINCIPLE 3: SUPPORTING EFFECTIVE INSTRUCTION AND LEADERSHIP

To support SEA and LEA development of evaluation systems that go beyond NCLB’s minimum HQT standards

• Develop and adopt SEA guidelines for local teacher and principal evaluation and support systems

• Ensure LEAs implement teacher and principal evaluation and support systems that are consistent with SEA guidelines

24

PRINCIPLE 3 - NEXT STEPS

Action Timeline

Principle 3 amendment submitted July 19, 2013

Response from U.S. Dept. of ED (high-risk status)

August 14, 2013

WA State response to “high-risk” status

September 12, 2013

Legislation request/change January-March 2014

25

STATE

An SEA is responsible for ensuring that an LEA develops and implements evaluation and support systems consistent with the guidelines the SEA has developed under principle 3 (as described in the document titled ESEA Flexibility). This includes ensuring that LEA evaluation and support systems take into account data on student growth in significant part in determining teacher and principal performance levels….For grades and subjects in which assessments are required under ESEA section 1111(b)(3), an SEA must define a statewide approach for measuring student growth based on such assessments.

Student growth data that is relevant to the teacher and subject matter must be a factor in the evaluation process and must be based on multiple measures that can include classroom-based, school-based, district-based, and state-based tools. Student growth means the change in student achievement between two points in time.

E2SSB 6696 contains language around student growth including:

ESEA Flexibility -- Frequently Asked Questions (C-53): What are an SEA’s responsibilities with regard to ensuring that an LEA’s evaluation and support systems consider student growth?

26

FEDERAL

• USED requires state test scores in tested grades and subjects to be a significant part of teacher evaluation

• Waiver requires change from “can be used” to “must be used” regarding state tests

• Supt. Dorn will seek request legislation to change ESSB 5895 language from can to must. It will also include a statement that will delay the implementation of using state test scores in teacher evaluations to 2016-17

• Smarter Balanced assessment system will have an effect on timeline for implementation

• Waiver decision expected May 2014

• 20% of Title 1 funds return to mandated use without a waiver:– $44M total available to

Supplemental Educational Service (SES) providers and to support School Choice

– $18M used three years ago

– $2.6M in Seattle

PRINCIPLE 3: ESEA WAIVER

27

USE OF STATE ASSESSMENTS TO MEASURE STUDENT GROWTH FOR

TEACHER EVALUATIONUpshot:

• State-based tools have limited applicability.

• Only teachers in Grades 4–8 with ELA or math courses can use summative testing as part of their evaluation.(HS math teachers with students in 9th grade Algebra or 10th grade Geometry could be included)

– Since evaluations are due in early May and SGP ratings aren’t available until Sept. 1, analysis will always be one year behind.

– Teacher attribution is challenging at all levels:

• Middle school students are reported by individual classes in CEDARS

• Elementary school students are reported by homeroom teacher in CEDARS

– Transition to a new set of standards and a new exam system will take time. 28

QUESTIONS?

29

30

Thank you!